Shame on you, Michael Bay

Rating: 2/10 (16 April 2006)

This movie gives me an impression of Michael Bay on some absurd pro-life crusade. I'm not aware of Mr. Bay's political stands, but the notion of memories as a genetic element to me seems like a - more or less conscious - criticism towards genetic research and technology. It seems slightly absurd from a scientific view, but also the over-all theme of the sanctity of life and the apparent meaninglessness in the lack of (or lack of gratitude towards) God adds stone to the burden. There is even a scene to underline the "thou shalt not play God" theme, where the mercenary, with his ethic and moral authority and conviction, nails the bad guy to the cross, no pun intended.
But that aside, there is more that signifies this movie being best left at the shelf at your local video store. There is little new to see here. The totalitarian total-controlled society of this utopian society has been depicted with greater success earlier. The futuristic elements of the movie aren't all that exciting. Visually, the idea of uniformity, in every way, is depicted with what seems to be slightly uninspired half-hearted imagination. Product placement is painstakingly obvious, they have Puma sneakers and xbox video games (Michael Bay and Bill Gates, that's for sure an unholy alliance worthy of a trilogy). The colours are fluorescent. The visual aspect is taken to far greater heights in, say, Equilibrium or Gattaca, as is the foundation of society. Unlike in "Brave New World", where sexual promiscuity is a civic duty, in the world of the products of "The Island", it is supposedly suppressed as the products are grown. There are "rules of proximity", among other things which leave the script with increasingly gaping holes. All in all, there aren't a lot of things in this film that you couldn't have seen before.
Among other things perhaps worth mentioning are the not-so-exiting attempts at depicting a society 20 years from now. There are hover trains out of Back to the Future and video phones, made by Nokia, as well as information directories presented to you by MSN Search. Of course, since this is a Michael Bay film, it needs a spectacular chase scene. In this movie there are quite a few chase scenes, and not all of them are all bad. You're still left with the feeling that the main characters escape simply because they are the main characters. When it comes to dealing with elementary physics, the movie fails again, but pleasantly there is a rather conservative number of exploding cars.
You would think the ever enchanting Scarlett Johansson would save this flick from being a total and utter failure, and that actually isn't far from the truth. Where McGregors character collapses as a result of his resolve and seemingly God-given ability to deal with any situation in manners that even James Bond would take pride in, Johansson depicts her character with the proper and balanced naivety. The movie doesn't float on her outofthisworldly appearance, although her blonde hair and clear eyes are at almost any time present in frame. But then, sadly, there is a sex scene. It seems misplaced and close to absurd. My first thought was that the producers said "Ok, Michael, you do know that we have Scarlett Johansson casted, there NEEDS to be a sex scene!". And then Michael replied "that's OK, I'll present it in a way that states that sex is a gift from God". There is very little that builds up tension between the characters to be released in this manner. There aren't a lot of deep glances stolen at the back of a scene, no, Mr. Bay, the innuendo-hating storyteller short on time (even as the movie clocks in at 130 minutes) gives us images of them holding each others hands and such. There's no time for magic, not even for the infatuation of mentally-aged 15-year-olds - but when they finally do get together, they do so without as much as a hint of awkwardness.
The movie is (too?) fast-paced to build up any proper momentum. There are directions in the story that could have been given a greater deal of attention, or have been cut altogether. The prime example being when Johanssons character asks herself if her survival means that the mother of the child she just spoke to over the msn/nokia video phone thingy (a child that refers to her as his mother) will die, but this is not at all elaborated. Another example is Buscemi's character simply being killed off and that's the end of that. The movie definitely has its moments, but too often loses itself in futuristic un-funniness and snappy lines. There's plenty of fighting and/or fleeing to go twice around, and as noted, there's Scarlett Johansson. What's most notable to me, though, is the feeling that this movie could have presented an amusing twist to a well-used near-future story formula of totalitarity and unprecedented cruelty. Sadly, it doesn't.